But the phrase “drunk as Lords” obtained as late as the Regency, and English society during Georgian England was still ruled over by a spoiled and besotted lot of “aristocrats”, who were hardly known for their literacy. Rutger has a higher view of these guys than I do, which is fine. Perhaps I have read too many novels, for good or ill.

Stephen Gatlin

In most periods and cultures, aristocrats were indeed far from being good, gentle conversationalist. The learned were often either clergy or officials. As you mr. Gatlin say, the aristocrats were far too busy managing their estates and conquering enemy territory. This was the situation in Greece, Assyria, Babylon, and Europe.

But Europe is unique. There we see in late medieval and early modern history the rise of the centralized, bureaucratic state. Kings increasingly came to depend on schooled administrators, who could handle the complex paperwork. The aristocracy felt increasingly excluded: it did not have the necessary skills for governance. Logically, the aristocracy sought to educate itself, in order to retain top positions in the government and the military (warfare became increasingly technical, see artillery). It learned to write, to reflect and to analyse, all by reading the (Latin) classics.

So from political necessity, an ideal of nobility arose which included both the spirit of war and the spirit of philosophy.